qmax

A wallet's QSwap liquidity positions

qmax_get_liquidity_positions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Every QSwap pool a wallet has liquidity in (public chain data, so any 60-letter identity works): its liquidity units, share of the pool, what removing it all would pay (QU and tokens, before QSwap's flat 100,000 QU fee) and its value in QU at the pool's own price, read live from the contract. Read-only. Adding or removing liquidity is done in the QMax app with a wallet; this tool never builds or signs one.

'complete' is false when a pool could not be read and its positions are missing. 'earnedFeesQu' is already inside what removing pays, nothing pays it separately. Values are estimates at the pool's price, which can be far from what the tokens sell for on a thin market.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "identity": "<identity>"
    },
    "name": "qmax_get_liquidity_positions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`identity`	Yes	The wallet's 60-letter identity

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, and the description adds substantive context beyond them: the 'complete' flag semantics when a pool fails to read, the flat 100,000 QU removal fee, that 'earnedFeesQu' is already inside the removal payout, and that values are estimates at pool price possibly far from thin-market sale price. That is exactly the disclosure an agent needs.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the return contents, then the read-only boundary, then the field caveats — a sensible ordering. It is dense but every clause (fee, complete flag, earnedFeesQu, estimate caveat) carries distinct information; slightly long but not padded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-value burden and does so: it enumerates liquidity units, pool share, removal payout in QU and tokens, and QU valuation, plus the 'complete' and 'earnedFeesQu' semantics and pricing caveats. Nothing needed to interpret results or call correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description earns an increment by explaining the identity parameter's nature: it is public chain data and 'any 60-letter identity works', clarifying the 60-uppercase-letter pattern and its permissiveness. It adds real meaning beyond the schema's terse field description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a precise verb+resource: 'Every QSwap pool a wallet has liquidity in', scoping it as wallet-centric rather than pool-centric. That scope cleanly separates it from pool-oriented siblings like qmax_get_liquidity_pool, qmax_list_pools, and qmax_pool_detail. An agent can pick it without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It establishes clear context ('a wallet has liquidity in') and an explicit when-not: 'Adding or removing liquidity is done in the QMax app with a wallet; this tool never builds or signs one.' It does not name sibling alternatives for pool-level or asset-level queries, so it stops short of a full routing rule.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All qmax tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.